![]() We didn’t time the initial installation process, but even on a speedy i7-5930K running at 4.2GHz with an SSD, we’ve noticed in the past that installing AMD driver updates can take a bit of time. To be fair, Catalyst only took a second or two to launch on the same system, but Crimson is certainly faster.īut start times aren’t the only thing to improve. On our GPU test bed, right-clicking the desktop and choosing “AMD Radeon Settings” brings up the control panel virtually instantly. ![]() 0.5s using Qt, but one thing we can immediately confirm is that Crimson launches fast. That’s probably an edge case, as AMD used an older AMD E1-based APU and quoted an eight second start time vs. With Crimson, AMD is switching to the Qt library and claims up to a 10x improvement in UI launch times. Over the years, things have certainly been streamlined, but AMD Catalyst has never felt particularly responsive when it comes to launch times. NET Framework, the chief problem being the painfully slow startup time for the driver UI. ![]() We questioned AMD’s sanity back in 2002 when Catalyst first launched and required the installation of the Microsoft.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
Details
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |